parties and then may be appealed in front of the Court of Justice.
The soft law is adopted with some frequency in the tax area, as it is considered as
an appropriate instrument to achieve at a gradual process of coordination and
harmonization of national tax systems to the taxation models developed at
European level. The use of a political and programmatic intermediate transition
highlights once again the problem of the democratic legitimacy and the block of the
EU institutions with respect to the decision to be taken for the regulation of tax
(in line with what has been shown previously).
Even in this case it can be identified a basic distinction between indirect taxation
and direct taxation.
The discipline of indirect taxation is taken into particular consideration for the
soft law developed by the Commission. In fact, in the Neumark Report, approved in
1962, the process of tax harmonization of the European common market was
divided into three stages, strongly denoted by the action in the field of indirect
taxation: the first and fundamental step of integration concerned the tax reform of
3.2
The Legislation of European Union
71
turnover taxes business, with the replacement of the cumulative multistage tax
(so-called “cascading” tax), utilised in almost all the Member States, with the
value-added tax, characterized by an operating mechanism which guarantees the
neutrality of the economic production and marketing cycle; in the second stage it
had to be abolished the consumption taxes, whose proceeds had a modest impor-
tance especially when compared with the obstruction and distortion to full compe-
tition of enterprises on European territory; and, finally, in the third and final phase,
it had to be set up some mechanisms of administrative cooperation, especially with
regard to the fraud and evasion relating to the intra-Community trade for the
purposes of customs duties and value added tax. With regard to excise duty, the
report merely stated that those charges have to be attached to the socio-economic
characteristics of each country and therefore did not recommend the removal. It can
be pointed out that the Neumark Report stated also some proposed revision of the
discipline of direct taxes, which however took on a secondary position compared to
the intervention on indirect taxation.
Subsequently, the issue of indirect taxation was analysed in an episodic and
marginal way; so in the Werner Report in 1970, some recommendations were
formulated on accelerating the process of harmonization of value added tax and
excise duty through the approximation of the discipline (in partial contrast with the
Neumark Report).
With regard to the direct taxation it can be recorded the existence of a large
number of acts with programmatic content, typical expression of the EU soft law,
which in essence are to set out general aims of the process of European integration.
In this case, it clearly emerges the need to lead gradually to the elimination of fiscal
disparities on the taxation of enterprises and corporations through a continuous
approximation of national laws.
First of all, it must be mentioned the Neumark Report which discovered, as said
before, next to the fundamental revision of indirect taxation also some interventions
(although with a secondary axiological importance) in the field of direct taxation. In
the first stage of the dynamic program defined in the Neumark Report, it was
intended to set uniform criteria for the application of withholding tax on dividends
and interest. In the second phase, however, the harmonization of corporation tax
was identified as a crucial step in the process of fiscal integration of the common
market: the main points of the program elaborated in the report are identified in the
setting of a single rate at the EU level (to be determined by an approximation to the
average tax rate of physical persons), and in the definition of appropriate regulatory
mechanisms to prevent double taxation of intra-group dividends.
After the report Neumark, in 1967, it was developed the “program of tax
harmonization” by the Commission, which, elevating the level of importance of
direct taxation, fixed priority targets of economic integration such as a series of
interventions related to the field of direct taxation, and in particular the elimination
of international double taxation on dividends and interest, the homogenization of
corporate restructuring and mergers, the harmonization of the tax base of the tax on
business income with particular regard to depreciation.
72
3
The Sources of the European Taxation Law
In 1969, the Van der Temple Report contains a detailed study of different
methods of taxation of corporate income and identifies the preferred criterion for
the European integration in the “classic method”, consisting in taxing either the
company or the shareholder, because this method, although causing a phenomenon
of economic double taxation, seems likely to ensure an adequate implementation of
direct taxation, simple and free of distortions in the international relations (for
example, the mechanism of the tax credit, which is excluded by the double taxation
of company and shareholder, is not usually recognized in favour of non-resident).
So it is developed the idea of “neutrality” at the European level—to be identified in
the exclusion of interference with respect to the allocation of resources and invest-
ment (in line with the economic doctrine)—colliding with the “neutrality” at the
internal level (to be intended as the elimination of taxation systems which could
lead to double taxation).
Excluding the Werner Report, which was prepared in 1970 and is very briefly on
the subject of direct taxation, in 1980 it is presented by the Commission a further act
with a programmatic content very relevant to the Programme of approximating the
legal arrangements for the taxation of companies: the Burke Report identifies as the
primary goals of the process of European harmonization the definition of a common
tax rate, the approximation of the criterion of taxation of partnerships to that one
utilised for the corporation, the homogenization of the tax base, the solution of
transactional relations (especially about the foreign income).
In 1990 it was presented by the Commission to the Council a detailed document
for a fiscal study concerning the EU rules on companies (“
guidelines for corporate
taxation
”), where it was stated for the first time the importance of the principle of
subsidiarity in the field of taxation: with reference to the process of harmonization
of direct taxes it was argued that the intervention of the European Union should be
reserved only for those matters of tax law concerning transnational profiles that may
not be adjusted by Member States in a manner consistent with the theoretical and
liberalistic postulates of the European Union; accordingly, EU action should be
restricted to a limited number of profiles of the tax law, and it was maintained at the
national legislative the provisions to the regulation of all the other aspects having a
typically internal relief. In this document six proposals were formulated concerning
respectively the discipline of dividends between associated companies, the disci-
pline of the extraordinary transactions, the international arbitration, the regulation
of intra-EU flows of interest and royalties and, finally, the recognition of losses
within the European area.
One crucial point of soft law in EU tax matters is surely identifiable with the
presentation of the Ruding Report in 1992. In this document, the Commission faced
in a comprehensive manner the problem of the taxation of companies and collective
bodies in Europe, and defined not only the substantial fiscal discipline to be applied
in each country, but also the mechanisms of taxation of shareholders, the tax
benefits, the use of withholding tax. The report pointed out the existence of a
very different situation in the various Member States, in terms either of the tax
base or of the tax rates, which determined the phenomena of double taxation or tax
arbitrage, introducing a model of general taxation structure which was not efficient
3.2
The Legislation of European Union
73
and certainly not “neutral”. Still remaining the recognition of the full sovereignty
about taxation to the Member States, the Report Ruding formulated an articulated
proposal whose core consisted of the adoption of a common rate for the taxation of
companies (identified to the extent of 30%) and in a number of recommendations
aimed to eliminate the double taxation of interest and royalties, to approximate the
tax base and to reduce the tax burden on cross-border transactions.
3.2.6
In Particular, the Package “Monti” and the Importance
of the Issue of Harmful Tax Competition
The advance of globalization of markets and the fiscal bleeding that ensued have
increased the belief that tax competition between Member States not only alienates
the EU integration, but also hampers the identification of a balance of taxation,
creating situations of “fiscal crisis of the State”. This has resulted in a greater
awareness of the importance of coordination of tax policies of the countries of the
European Union in order to avoid the introduction of regulatory standards whose
main effect consisted in the erosion of the tax base.
Having this purpose, it has been issued a programmatic provision by the Com-
mission in 1996, in a memorandum addressed to the Council, with the aim to
contain the phenomena of harmful tax competition between States. This document
has been expressly implemented by the ECOFIN Council, with a resolution of 9/1/
1997 (so-called package “Monti” by the name of the Commissioner in charge).
At first, it established the approval of a “code of conduct”, whose content is not
legally binding and therefore expressing in the form of a political engagement,
through which it is programmed: i) the blocking of new measures of direct taxation
that, by supporting the localization of productive activities in a country, may
produce competitive situations compared to other countries; ii) at a later time,
the gradual dismantling of the existing tax rules which can generate competition
between the States.
At second, in the memorandum it was formulated the proposal for a directive on
interest and royalties between associated enterprises aimed to introduce the princi-
ple of taxation only in the country of residence of the recipient, in order to eliminate
the complicate (and expensive) formalities required for the reimbursement of taxes.
Finally, it was defined as a proposal for a directive on the taxation of savings
income of non-resident individuals, where it was prefigured an alternative system:
i) the non-applicability of withholding tax and the obligation of communication and
the exchange of information between the State in which the interest is paid and the
State of residence of the recipient; ii) or alternatively, the application of
withholding tax to the extent of 20% without prior exchange of information. The
symbolic value of this solution seems to transcend the specific case: the traditional
criterion of non-discrimination taxation of non-residents, which resulted in a kind
of forced harmonization, was essentially abandoned in favour of a pragmatic
solution that leaded to the reduction of competition tax through the coordination
74
3
The Sources of the European Taxation Law
of the national systems, in compliance with the choices made by the individual
States.
The feature of the package “Monti” is the choice of a regulatory solution which
is no longer “surgical”—as it was expressed in the reports and documents previ-
ously formulated by the Commission on a programmatic issue, intended to
interventions
a` la carte
, limited to individual and specific topics of the direct
taxation— but rather consists in the adoption of a global approach, aimed at
addressing the issue of direct taxation in a general perspective in order to prevent
some forms of harmful tax competition between individual States within the
common market.
Therefore, this taxation plan is derived not only by the formulation of proposals
for directives in order to important aspects of direct taxation and of the movement
of capital, but also by the definition of a document of great axiological importance,
which is the “code of conduct”, intended to provide general guidelines for a
coordinated action at EU level in order to reduce the distortions arising from the
national tax laws.
3.2.7
The Translation of Soft Law in Binding Legislation by the EU
Institutions
To assess the degree of effectiveness of EU soft law, it seems appropriate to observe
a relevant impact that the papers mentioned above have exercised with respect to
the formation of derivate EU law.
At first, it can be seen that the Neumark Report has exercised a profound
influence on the European legislature, clearly inspiring the legislative solutions
adopted for the VAT discipline. Indeed, as noted above, the Directives that have
marked the gradual implementation of the process of harmonization of turnover
taxes can be traced back to three phases roughly coincident with the three stages of
the program outlined by the Neumark Report.
With regard to direct taxes, it can be observed that the relevant series of
regulatory actions carried out in 1992 (the two directives on the extraordinary
transactions and on the relations between the “mother-daughter” companies, as
well as the mentioned Convention on the transfer price) drew its conceptual basis
from the “Guidelines for the corporate taxation” as well as from the report Scriv-
ener, which laid down the principle of the importance of tax treatment of companies
with respect to the process of completing the internal market.
Rather
limited,
however,
it
appears
the
effect
produced
by
other
recommendations. Even the important information contained in the Report Ruding
produced modest normative results, considering that there were not issued
Directives, neither there were formulated proposals for Directives related to the
findings of the Report; nor it can be found a successful program set out in other
reports of the Commission, with a practical application in regulatory acts (or even
for proposals aimed to legislative acts) of the European Union.
3.2
The Legislation of European Union
75
Emblematic, instead, was the fate of the “Monti” package, because the proposed
Directives on the issues raised by the memorandum (particularly with regard to the
taxation of interest and royalties) have resulted in the issuing of the final regulatory
measures (and in particular of the aforementioned Directives n. 48/2003 and
no. 49/2003). In regard to the Code of Conduct it may be noted a significant
adhesion to the concrete program indicated in the memorandum of the Commission.
A first step was taken, on 3/9/1998, by the establishment of a Working Group
(known as the Code of Conduct Group) called upon to undertake a constant
monitoring on the rules adopted by the individual Member States. This group
formed a voluntary organization among the States aimed to ensure a set of
behaviours with the aim to produce a concrete effect to the instructions provided
by the Code of Conduct.
Furthermore, in order to give more strength to the recommendations contained in
the Code of Conduct, the Commission intended to bring its provisions to the
procedure applied for the State aids. Therefore, it was allowed the application of
the strict discipline established for the State aids, and in particular the obligation of
the prior notification to the Commission concerning the new tax measures, as well
as the penetrating powers of the Commission with regard to the control and
supervision of the national legislation. In this way, the Commission attempted to
circumvent the essentially political nature of the recommendations set out in the
Code of Conduct, acting by means of interpretation in order to restore these
requirements in a legally binding manner.
The impression is that the very enactment of the Code of Conduct represents a
turning point in the process leading to the adoption of the European soft law: the
attitude initially cautious of the EU bodies has imprinted with the issuance of the
Code of Conduct a very significant acceleration to the scope of provisions contained
in its recommendations, either from a methodological point of view (a setting of
rules expressing a global approach rather than an atomistic programmatic interven-
tion), or in terms of prescriptive regulation (proposing an interpretative reconstruc-
tion with the aim to increase the degree of the binding effect of the provisions). In
this perspective, it seems possible to argue that the soft law instruments begin to
become juridical mechanisms with a greater intensity compared to the program-
matic function of the original legislation, thus assuming an increasingly important
role in the process of fiscal integration within the European Union.
It should also be noted that the discipline of the Code of Conduct has been finally
approved and converted into agreement legally binding on the Member States
following the meeting of ECOFIN held on 6/3/2003.
3.2.8
A Final Assessment Regarding the Use of Sources of EU
Derivate Law
The process of law-making bodies of the European Union has a constantly vibrating
path, as characterized by the alternating phases of the law enactment.
76
3
The Sources of the European Taxation Law
In the first period, corresponding essentially to the second half of the sixties, the
EU authorities have issued a large number of legal acts with regard to the indirect
taxation, considered as a fundamental step in the process of economic integration of
the common market. In particular, the implementation of value added tax and
customs law, as well as indirect taxation of capital raising, have been set in its
basic features with Directives and Regulations published between 1967 and 1969.
There has been, then, a long period of inactivity, interrupted occasionally by
sporadic legal measures, which does not express a decisive importance with respect
to the general configuration of the European taxation.
In the early nineties, there were really significant EU Regulations: following two
Regulations in 1992 it was introduced the unique EU Customs Code; with three
Directives of 1991 and 1992 it has been revised substantially the discipline of VAT,
calling the move to the tax system prefigured as definitive (namely taxation in the
country of origin); two basic Directives have been issued in 1992 in relation to the
direct taxes; it was regulated in three Regulations, issued during the period 1991/
1992, the stage of the proceedings and in particular the exchange of information and
the administrative tax cooperation.
The most recent phase is marked instead by more meaningful instruments of soft
law, and in particular by the definition of the Code of Conduct, which accentuated
the effectiveness of soft law through the interpretative passage to the procedure of
the State aids.
It is not difficult to bring these distinct phases of intensity of the EU legislation to
as many crucial periods of the development of European integration. In the second
half of the sixties it came into play the ability of the EU to give shape to the rules of
economic freedom and trade under the Treaty, considered essential in order to start
the functioning of the internal market; therefore, the adjustment of the tax on the
affairs or on the business and the removal of customs barriers was considered,
rightly, as an inescapable implementation of the European architecture. In the early
nineties, it sharpened the common sensitivity to accelerate the process of economic
integration of the Member States, which culminated with the signing of the Treaty
of Maastricht in 1992; consistently, it was provided a significant impetus to the tax
standardization, with a generalist approach and not limited only to indirect taxation,
in the belief that the regulation of the phenomenon of taxation constitutes a
fundamental means to implement the European development project. And finally,
the most recent phase, essentially devoted to the harmonization of direct taxes,
responds to the need to facilitate the introduction of the single currency for the
common market, eliminating the phenomena of the harmful tax competition, which
in a highly integrated economy may be distorting the competitive structure and, at
least in the EU perspective, might alter the framework of fundamental freedoms.
It should also be noted that the legal sources of law used for the integration of EU
tax law appear more clearly articulated than the framework of the principles
expressed in the Treaty with regard to taxation, to the point of legitimizing the
view that the derivate law surpass the primary law in the regulation of the pheno-
menon of taxation (also considering the need to protect the fundamental freedoms of
the European Union).
3.2
The Legislation of European Union
77
However, it must be noted that the EU derivate law for taxation appears to be
composed by a small number of sources: and indeed, in absolute terms, the sources
of EU law that dealt with to adjust the taxation appear to be very few, especially
when compared with the enormous production of the national tax legislation of the
Member States.
78
3
The Sources of the European Taxation Law
The Role of the Jurisprudence of the Court
of Justice Within the EU Taxation Law
4
Contents
4.1
The Role of the Court of Justice Within the System of the EU Taxation Law . . . . . . . . . .
79
4.1.1
The Judicial Power in the European Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
79
4.1.2
The Role of the European Court of Justice in the System of Sources of the EU
Taxation Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81
4.1.3
Considerations on the Contribution of the Advocates General to the Formation
of the Decisions of the Court of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
82
4.2
The Main Guidelines Followed by the European Jurisprudence on Taxation . . . . . . . . . . .
83
4.2.1
The Essentially Acknowledging Attitude of the Court of Justice About the VAT 83
4.2.2
The Casuistic Attitude of the Court of Justice on Excises or Duties, as Well as on
the State Aids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
84
4.2.3
The Creative Jurisprudence in Relation to the Direct Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
85
4.2.4
The Rule of Reason and the Balance of the European Interest with the National
Interests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
86
4.2.5
Some Synthetic Observations on the Role of Court of Justice Relating
to the Regulation of the European Taxation System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
87
4.1
The Role of the Court of Justice Within the System
of the EU Taxation Law
4.1.1
The Judicial Power in the European Union
The Court of Justice of the European Union (also referred for convenience as the
“ECJ”) has the function of ensuring the uniform interpretation and application of
EU law in all the Member States (“nomophylactic” function).
The ECJ is called (according to art. 267 TFEU) to give preliminary rulings
concerning the interpretation of EU law and thus to carry out a hermeneutics
reconstruction of the rules and the principles laid down in the Treaty and in the
normative acts of derivate EU law. Indeed, even if the national courts are required
to implement the EU rules into national law, because the law is directly applicable
in the Member States (see what said earlier in the Chap.
2
, Sect.
2.4
), they can
#
Springer International Publishing Switzerland and G. Giappichelli Editore 2017
P. Boria,
Taxation in European Union
, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-53919-5_4
79
propose questions concerning the interpretation of EU law or the compatibility of
provisions of national law with the European legal order.
In particular, the Court of Justice has been asked to rule on the
quaestio juris
(question of law) defining the meaning of the EU legislation relevant to the
proceedings, while the national court is required to rule on the question of fact,
thus arriving at a decision on the specific facts by applying the relevant standards
(including the EU standards).
The content of the decision of the Court of Justice concerns not only the
reconstruction of the EU rule (and thus the interpretation in the strict sense), but
also often the compatibility of the internal rules with the parameter offered by the
EU regulation. The historical fact tends to be considered in the judgment of the
Court of Justice as the demarcation element of the
thema decidendum
, especially in
order to establish the applicability of the EU law (and therefore the jurisdiction of
the Court of the Justice).
The mechanism of the preliminary ruling—also referred to as “interpretive
ruling of the European Union”—is presented as a faculty for various national courts
and becomes an obligation only for the courts of last instance (for the decisions of
which it is no longer possible to submit an appeal).
Through this judicial mechanism, the national courts are presented as a kind of
“tool” of the process of European integration in order to promote the uniformity and
the correct application of the EU law; thus avoiding that the courts of different
Member States can form a jurisprudence conditioned by the local legal traditions,
the preliminary ruling leads to a “judicial cooperation” between separate but
coordinated legal orders, and seems destined to produce a centralized and
European jurisprudence regarding the EU law, with respect to which the
contributions of the national courts are valued as inputs and impulses from different
legal systems that converge into a single regulated context.
The interpretative decisions given by the Court of Justice as a result of the
preliminary ruling produce a binding effect for the national court which has
required the intervention of the ECJ (and for the successive stages of the same
trial). These decisions also are intended to expand their effects beyond the judgment
to which they refer, as they relate to general issues; in this sense it can be argued
that the interpretative judgments by ECJ may produce a binding effect on the
national courts and the national public administrations.
As for the effectiveness of the temporal judgments of the Court of Justice, it
applies the basic rule of the effectiveness
ex tunc
(“since then”), with recognition of
the latitude of interpretation and validity of EU legislation from the original outset
of the European regulation. Moreover, this criterion was often balanced with the
requirements of legal certainty and of the protection of innocent third parties; so,
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |